Andrews v. Swartz 156 U.S. 272 (1895)

U.S. Supreme Court

Andrews v. Swartz, 156 U.S. 272 (1895)

A review by the appellate court of a a final judgment in a criminal case is not a necessary element of due process of law, and may be granted, if at all, on such terms as to the state seems proper.

The repugnancy of a state statute to the constitution of the state will not authorize a writ of habeas corpus from a court of the United States unless the petitioner is in custody by virtue of such statute, and unless also the statute conflicts with the federal Constitution.

When a state court has entered upon the trial of a criminal case under a statute not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States, and has jurisdiction of the offense and of the accused, mere error in the conduct of the trial cannot be made the basis of jurisdiction in a court of the United States to review the proceedings upon writ of habeas corpus.

The case is stated in the opinion.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.